The designs were invited by the art and fashion magazine Document Journal.

Share this story

Lexus Lunar, by Yung Presciutti, is described thus: "Lexus Lunar is a massive transport vehicle designed to explore and discover the moon safely. The vehicle is divided into two parts: the bottom consists of a platform with 6 rugged wheels to give the freedom to go wherever you want. The upper part holds the living area. The two components of the vehicle can be also divided, with the upper portion detaching to create the start of a lunar colony."

Lexus

The Lexus Moon Racer, also by Yung Presciutti, is my favorite of the concepts. I don't think it needs to be streamlined for an airless rock, though.

Lexus

Keisuke Matsuno designed the Lexus Lunar Cruiser. The description reads "'Lunar Cruiser' is a multipurpose vehicle for land and sky use on the moon. It has large tires that provide comfortable movement even on rough lunar conditions and can turn 90 degrees to fly like a drone. These allow the driver to explore the lunar land and sky freely. The organically shaped cabin has a unique body graphic in the shape of a “3D spindle motion”, providing an open vision and comfortable interior space while having an iconic appearance." But I don't quite understand how the rotated tires are supposed to generate lift on an airless moon.

Lexus

Karl Dujardin designed Zero Gravity. I think it wouldn't look out of place on Naboo; it has that elegant aesthetic to it.

Lexus

The blurb from Lexus says the concept "represents the Lexus future through reinterpretation of the signature spindle form. For Zero Gravity, the spindle grille becomes a 3D spindle architecture, and sharp and square edges transform into fluid and curved surfaces, creating a mysterious design language. The motorcycle-style architecture enables a stronger connection to driver/pilot allowing for more direct control and feedback as human and machine mesh. With this model, the driver maintains total control while gliding smoothly over the rough, pitted and bumpy lunar surface, even at an estimated speed of 500 kilometers per hour."

Lexus

More Zero Gravity details

Lexus

Are you hearing prog rock? I'm hearing prog rock.

Lexus

Julien Marie's Bouncing Moon Roller. This one looks like it might be fun to roll across the moon's surface in.

Lexus

Another Yung Presciutti design, this one's called the Lexus Lunar Mission.

Lexus

Finally, there's Jean-Baptiste Henry's Lexus Cosmos.

Lexus

Lexus says that it is "a transportation concept designed for both space and the lunar surface, the Lexus Cosmos features a fully sculpted glass shape that functions as a massive observatory to not only enjoy the view, but also explore the low gravity phenomenon. With a rear cockpit that emphasizes the driving feel and a front portion dedicated to contemplation, the idea was to create a new luxury and exclusive experience for the future.

Lexus

I think this concept would be at home in an Iain M. Banks novel.

Lexus

Passengers float inside the Lexus Cosmos.

Lexus

The Lexus LF-30 is the brand's concept of a battery EV a decade from now.

Lexus

I love a good concept car. And I'm pretty keen on space—Charlie Brown bears responsibility for getting me interested at a very early age. So obviously my interest was going to be piqued by an email from Lexus containing a bunch of design sketches from ED2, its European Advanced Design Studio thinking about what we might drive on the moon.

Further Reading

The designs—seven in total—were created by the design studio for an art and fashion publication called Document Journal, which invited a range of designers to imagine what life might be like on the moon. In Lexus' case, the inspiration was the company's recent LF-30 concept car; you may remember if from our coverage of last year's LA Auto Show.

"When Document Journal approached us about the Lunar Design Portfolio, our team was working on the LF-30 Concept, which represents the "Lexus Electrified" futuristic vision for Lexus. The design team was already looking beyond near-term production and ahead to how advanced technology will change the way we interact with vehicles," said Ian Cartabiano, President of ED2. "The lunar project came at the right time, half way through the LF-30 development. It gave the team a chance to dream further out, and then apply some of the design language from the LF- 30 interior to their lunar proposals."

The designs run the gamut from somewhat-normal wheeled vehicles to much less conventional designs. The six-wheeled Lexus Lunar is perhaps the easiest design I could imagine cruising around on the Sea of Tranquility and better integrates Lexus' hourglass-shaped grille than any of the OEM's current road cars. The Lexus Moon Racer and Lexus Lunar Cruiser are both four-wheeled cars; one a sleek pod with hexagonally faceted tires, the other is able to rotate its tires by 90 degrees "to fly like a drone," which is puzzling because of the wheels are meant to become lift rotors then surely that would require some sort of atmosphere to work.

Things start getting a little weirder with Zero Gravity, a hover bike that would not look out of place on Naboo. The Bouncing Moon Roller looks a bit like those pods from one of the recent Jurassic Park films, with a gyroscopic cell protected by a "flexible graphene nanotube-based bubble." Then there's the Lexus Lunar Mission, which is a flying vehicle that feels the most phoned-in, and finally the Lexus Cosmos, which might be most at home in the world(s) of Iain M. Banks.

Concept cars may look wild and may never be built but they don't break the laws of physics. Most of these concepts do. Except for that first one. Next lunar rover will probably be pressurized and could be turned into habitat module.

It really bugs the hell out of me, actually. These are design artist given a shot to be paid to design vehicles that are free of one of the biggest physical constraints vehicles on Earth need to consider and what they come up with embraces that constraint in the interest of looking cool, I guess. It's boring. They're boring. These artist suck. Full stop.

It might have been nice if the artists/designers had a seminar on what the Lunar environment is like before they leaped into their designs. Working with constraints is part of the fun of a design, according to the designers I've worked with.

1) Aero - swoopy lines are fine and look cool, but not for aerodynamics (maybe on Mars, though?)2) Temperature on surface - The Moon varies between -200 and +100C - That's an interesting design prompt - what stylish and cool way can you deal with that (retractable shutters, variable transmission windows and radiators, etc.)3) The incredibly abrasive Lunar regolith (soil). - designs with moving parts need to deal with it.4) Regolith cohesiveness (or lack thereof) - it isn't cohesive, but it does have static charging. That rolling ball is going to be covered with dust almost instantly.

The key is that these are concepts from artists and designers, a whole different breed from scientists and engineers. As such, they see things very differently. I remember in my younger days I dated an artist, and was always amazed at just how differently they see the world. Not better or worse, just different.

The key is that these are concepts from artists and designers, a whole different breed from scientists and engineers. As such, they see things very differently. I remember in my younger days I dated an artist, and was always amazed at just how differently they see the world. Not better or worse, just different.

Problem is that such people design things that need to be used. That's how we get worthless buildings that were designed for some sort of looks and not actual use. If the design fucks up the function it's a bad design no matter how uninformed the "artist" is.

The key is that these are concepts from artists and designers, a whole different breed from scientists and engineers. As such, they see things very differently. I remember in my younger days I dated an artist, and was always amazed at just how differently they see the world. Not better or worse, just different.

Problem is that such people design things that need to be used. That's how we get worthless buildings that were designed for some sort of looks and not actual use. If the design fucks up the function it's a bad design no matter how uninformed the "artist" is.

Architects do have to use engineering as part of their designs, and in the end, the customer has final say over whether their design is chosen, and whether they require changes to meet their needs.

I'd think a major consideration in the design is how it packs for transport to the moon. So while aerodynamics wouldn't be a factor, something that is compact and/or can be assembled on the surface would be good.

AxMi Ninja'd me here; but that was my first question too... why are these streamlined?!?

Indeed: very little about these suggests that the designers have a basic understanding of the moon.

As a designer, I can confirm that most designers have a somewhat sketchy grasp of science. Or sometimes even reality.

This is sadly common elsewhere as well.

Once upon a time in Australia, there was a pest called the "cane beetle" (still is, but I digress). Someone decided that they wanted to get rid of this pest: so they imported an animal called a "cane toad", figuring it would eat the little bugs.

Thing is: the cane beetle is about the only think in Australia that the cane toad (now a far worse blight than the beetle ever was) doesn't kill.

The beetle is active in the day and lives up on the tops of plants; and the toad is active at night and lives on the ground. It's also insanely poisonous; so anything smaller than a cane toad is eaten by the toad and anything larger dies trying to eat the toad.

When designing a solution to a problem, even as practice, it's important to know a bit about both the problem and the solution.

The key is that these are concepts from artists and designers, a whole different breed from scientists and engineers. As such, they see things very differently. I remember in my younger days I dated an artist, and was always amazed at just how differently they see the world. Not better or worse, just different.

This is my key criticism:

These artist don't see anything different.

They're regurgitating the exact same sci-fi concepts as all of their colleagues have for the past 3 decades. Here was an opportunity because it's free of some constraints imposed by Earth, (atmosphere, 1G gravity) and full of new constraints (temperature, material, a near monochromatic enviroment).

Good artists would run with it. Engage with the new environmental variables and produce vehicle concepts that break with our preconceptions with regard to what a vehicle from the future should look like.

The key is that these are concepts from artists and designers, a whole different breed from scientists and engineers. As such, they see things very differently. I remember in my younger days I dated an artist, and was always amazed at just how differently they see the world. Not better or worse, just different.

Problem is that such people design things that need to be used. That's how we get worthless buildings that were designed for some sort of looks and not actual use. If the design fucks up the function it's a bad design no matter how uninformed the "artist" is.

Architects do have to use engineering as part of their designs, and in the end, the customer has final say over whether their design is chosen, and whether they require changes to meet their needs.

I used to believe that. However in Sweden architects have no physics in their education. It's just drawing shit and then telling engineers to build it. Considering the newly built buildings in Germany I would say that German ones are on the same level.

Finally the goal of the "customer" is to sell an overpriced apartment not a good one

Seriously, what's with all the hate here? So what if they look aerodynamic to some degree? These are artist concepts. Yes people know there's no atmosphere on the moon. That doesn't mean a design can't look good as well as being functional. It literally makes no real difference in this case, so they might as well give it some beauty. The artists obviously had fun with this assignment. Good for them!

Seriously, what's with all the hate here? So what if they look aerodynamic to some degree? These are artist concepts. Yes people know there's no atmosphere on the moon. That doesn't mean a design can't look good as well as being functional. It literally makes no real difference in this case, so they might as well give it some beauty. The artists obviously had fun with this assignment. Good for them!

The point is that without aerodynamic constraints, there's no point in using shapes that use more material but otherwise yield less usable space. Might as well make it into a box/ball and get more legroom.

Seriously, what's with all the hate here? So what if they look aerodynamic to some degree? These are artist concepts. Yes people know there's no atmosphere on the moon. That doesn't mean a design can't look good as well as being functional. It literally makes no real difference in this case, so they might as well give it some beauty. The artists obviously had fun with this assignment. Good for them!

These are literal anti-gravity vehicles with hovering glass plates making up the tires. "Functional."

Seriously, what's with all the hate here? So what if they look aerodynamic to some degree? These are artist concepts. Yes people know there's no atmosphere on the moon. That doesn't mean a design can't look good as well as being functional. It literally makes no real difference in this case, so they might as well give it some beauty. The artists obviously had fun with this assignment. Good for them!

Because thinking like that is what got us Tesla like tablet as the only interface in a car. Yes, it looks clean but it is shit to use, dangerous and in a car is there to take you places safely not so that it looks good while you are dying in a crash because you were fighting the UI.

Seriously, what's with all the hate here? So what if they look aerodynamic to some degree? These are artist concepts. Yes people know there's no atmosphere on the moon. That doesn't mean a design can't look good as well as being functional. It literally makes no real difference in this case, so they might as well give it some beauty. The artists obviously had fun with this assignment. Good for them!

These are literal anti-gravity vehicles with hovering glass plates making up the tires. "Functional."

Yep. Or rocket powered vehicles whose fuel supply would last... a few minutes?

Seriously, what's with all the hate here? So what if they look aerodynamic to some degree? These are artist concepts. Yes people know there's no atmosphere on the moon. That doesn't mean a design can't look good as well as being functional. It literally makes no real difference in this case, so they might as well give it some beauty. The artists obviously had fun with this assignment. Good for them!

These are literal anti-gravity vehicles with hovering glass plates making up the tires. "Functional."

Yep. Or rocket powered vehicles whose fuel supply would last... a few minutes?

Given the very low gravity and essentially zero friction with "the air"; you might be able to get farther than you'd think with a decent tank of reaction mass.

This could be a pretty cool idea but it was executed horribly. Concept cars are about exploring what might be possible in the future. They are often unrealistic and aren't yet viable but they are somewhat grounded in reality. Nobody comes out with a concept car which relies on anti-grav or is designed to never drive and just teleport directly to the destination. It would defeat the whole purpose of a concept car.

Real lunar concept vehicles should likewise be ground in reality. Any project which is more than lets make some random stuff that is useless but cool looking should look at the new environment. With new capabilities does the moon bring? What new challenges does it bring? That serves as the basis for new concepts. How would a new concept take advantage of those capabilities and overcome those challenges in a functional way.

Seriously, what's with all the hate here? So what if they look aerodynamic to some degree? These are artist concepts. Yes people know there's no atmosphere on the moon. That doesn't mean a design can't look good as well as being functional. It literally makes no real difference in this case, so they might as well give it some beauty. The artists obviously had fun with this assignment. Good for them!

These are literal anti-gravity vehicles with hovering glass plates making up the tires. "Functional."

Yep. Or rocket powered vehicles whose fuel supply would last... a few minutes?

Given the very low gravity and essentially zero friction with "the air"; you might be able to get farther than you'd think with a decent tank of reaction mass.

I want you to image a conference where a bunch of artists present their concepts for future artificial hearts. That's too stupid to even contemplate, right? What an artist thinks an artificial heart should look like has nothing to do with reality.

This is exactly the same. They asked a bunch of artists, that very obviously know nothing about vehicles that might operate on the moon, to draw some pretty pictures based off the bad sci-fi they have seen throughout their life.

Who cares what these artists think a moon vehicle should look like? That's as pointless as asking a musician how they think a nuclear engine should sound. You would literally be better off going to a sci-fi convention and browsing the art section. You'd like find more interesting, original, and correct ideas on lunar vehicles there, then at this stupid event.

Seriously, this is like having a medical convention and inviting artists to present their stupid ideas on replacement organs, instead of doctors, researchers, and people who actually make replacement organs.

As an engineer, I find these stupid events (and events like this) deeply annoying. If they want to have a sci-fi art show, that's fine, just don't pretend like it is an engineering event. If it is an event to show off lunar vehicle concepts, rather than cool sci-fi pictures, they actually need the bulk of the work done by actual engineers. It's fine to have an artist on the team to make everything look pretty, but my brain hurts from the stupidity of it just being a team of artist.

You wouldn't have artists replace doctors. It doesn't work any better when you have artists replace engineers.

I want you to image a conference where a bunch of artists present their concepts for future artificial hearts. That's too stupid to even contemplate, right? What an artist thinks an artificial heart should look like has nothing to do with reality.

This is exactly the same. They asked a bunch of artists, that very obviously know nothing about vehicles that might operate on the moon, to draw some pretty pictures based off the bad sci-fi they have seen throughout their life.

Who cares what these artists think a moon vehicle should look like? That's as pointless as asking a musician how they think a nuclear engine should sound. You would literally be better off going to a sci-fi convention and browsing the art section. You'd like find more interesting, original, and correct ideas on lunar vehicles there, then at this stupid event.

Seriously, this is like having a medical convention and inviting artists to present their stupid ideas on replacement organs, instead of doctors, researchers, and people who actually make replacement organs.

As an engineer, I find these stupid events (and events like this) deeply annoying. If they want to have a sci-fi art show, that's fine, just don't pretend like it is an engineering event. If it is an event to show off lunar vehicle concepts, rather than cool sci-fi pictures, they actually need the bulk of the work done by actual engineers. It's fine to have an artist on the team to make everything look pretty, but my brain hurts from the stupidity of it just being a team of artist.

You wouldn't have artists replace doctors. It doesn't work any better when you have artists replace engineers.

Typical engineer. Looks down on the arts and takes every opportunity to extol the virtues of being born smart enough to go to university and get an engineering degree and how superior that makes you to everyone else.

Then goes and chain watches the entire Marvel Universe series in one go with a desert of Lord of the Rings. Raves about how awesome they all are to friends. Lusts after well designed cars.